A Kansas City Star news article, dated 12/24/16, reported that during the last few months, Kraker had been shipping 17,000 - 18,000 pens per month.

So how come I've only been able to find two (and both those on eBay)?

Cheers,

Dennis B

With apologies to Bob (and George)

Where have all the Kraker's gone
Long time passing
Where have all the Kraker's gone
Long time ago. . .



(Sorry - I couldn't resist.)


Here's my theory- in a dark alley in Chicago, a shadowy figure meets with Walter Sheaffer. Both are clad in long raincoats, their hats low over their heads. A few whispers - money changes hands, along with customer lists. . .

Later, Penelope Prunella, counter clerk at the Pharmacy in Mattumwa Iowa picks up her Kraker pen to enter a sale in the company books. She sets the pen down. A customer leans across the counter to ask about a tonic. His coat somehow catches the pen, and as he brings his hand back it takes the pen with it, dropping it to the floor. We hear a crunch.

"Oh, I'm sorry" the customer says. "I'm afraid it's a total loss." picking up the inky mess of black hard rubber. "Here, have my Sheaffer instead." As he leaves, we recognize the raincoat. . .


Seriously - I think this subject has been addressed on Pentrace and Lion and Pen, where the theories have been put forth that 1. Lots of Kraker pens did not say Kraker, and 2. Many other pens that were produced by the tens of thousands in the 19teens are hard to find today, as they were not expected to last 90 years.

I would add to these observations the fact that Kraker's were 2nd tier pens, so they would probably not have been preserved as well as some of the more valuable pens of the period - No fancy gold filled trim, no overlays, no household name. I suspect in the 1950s a lot of people would have hung on to Grandpa's Waterman #7 or Parker Big Red, but who ever heard of Kraker?


John

John;

Kraker is first tier material and found in overlays, and fancy gold trim. The Kraker works were very short lived however.

Roger W.

Duh :doh: :doh:

The one right above has gold trim. :doh: Need to wake up today. :doh: :doh:
Stop being an idiot John

Sorry!

John

John;

LOL, take it easy Dude - you'll hurt yourself!

Roger W.

George Dubiel admitted to blowing up Waterman 58's with firecrackers when he was a kid.
Imagine what people were doing to Krakers!!!

Framebaer

Hmm.., I was in a weird mood on Thursday.

It has occurred to me that some people on FPN have not heard about Kraker, so perhaps I should take a moment to explain.

George Michael Kraker was a business partner of Walter Sheaffer in the early days of the Sheaffer pen company - one who potentially offered crucial advice and support for Walter to get his business started in 1912.

Some time between 1912 and 1914 the relationship soured. According to Sheaffer, Kraker made a deal to be the exclusive distributor of Sheaffer pens in several midwestern states. Then Kraker went and set up the Kraker Pen Co. in Kansas City, MO. and started selling lever-filler pens that allegedly infringed on Walter Sheaffer's lever-filler patent. George Kraker and Harvey Craig, one of Sheaffer's key production supervisors who joined with Kraker, then filed an Interfearance claim with the US Patent Office (a claim that Sheaffer's double-bar filling mechanism was really invented by Craig, and thus Sheaffer shouldn't have the patent). The US Patent Office ruled in Sheaffers favor. Then Sheaffer sued Kraker and C.E. Barrett, who supplied infringing hard rubber parts to Kraker in 1914.

In the end, Walter Sheaffer won the case and somehow in the aftermath acquired the Kraker Pen Co, though how and when that occurred is somewhat in question. The Kraker Pen Co. did not officially fold until 1921, and some of the management of the Kraker Pen Co. went on to have successful careers at Sheaffer. Kraker went on to purchase the Akron pen company in 1917, and continued to have a long career making pens, but he never again made a pen under the Kraker name - fueling speculation that Sheaffer was somehow able to aquire the Kraker name and sat on it for the rest of his life. It was a bitter and sordid affair in the early days of the fountain pen industry.

For further reading:

Excerpt from Walter Sheaffer autobiography.


Kraker Pen Co thread at Lion and Pen

Introduction to David Nishimura’s articles on early days of Sheaffer

Further links and references are appreciated.

Roger W. probably knows about as much about the story as anyone, and is, I believe, one of the few people to have read the 2000+ page transcript of Sheaffer vs. Barrett – the official name of the case (C.E. Barrett was named co-defendant for supplying parts used by the Kraker pen co.).

John

John;

Good wrap up of the issues! A couple of points, not being an attorney I'm not real clear on it and maybe Dennis Bowden (when I get him a copy) being of the lofty legal profession can clarify further. Anyway, it goes like this, first there is the interference (the claim Harvey Craig invented the double bar which is what truly makes a Sheaffer lever filler viable) filed with the U.S. Patent Office by Craig and pals claiming it is their invention (Harvey G. Craig vs. Walter A. Sheaffer, Interference No. 38392A). This gets introduced into the later suit of Walter A. Sheaffer vs. C. E. Barrett, In Equity No. 348, Infringement of Patent No. 1,118,240 (US District Court Northern District of Illinois Eastern Division).

Why Barrett and why not Kraker (and that is how it goes)? Because Barrett was producing the barrels for Kraker so Sheaffer was shutting down Krakers supply in this way. We still don't know how Sheaffer gets Kraker but, speculation runs now that Sheaffer was able to acquire stock probably after Kraker became distressed after losing their supplier which they presumably did. Remember that all these folks were business partners at one time and business is business after all Kraker isn't disolved until 1921. C. E. Barrett could not have been more cooperative in the testimony given in the case.

Well, I have 500 more pages to read and will have some time to pursue that shortly.

Roger W.

I went back and updated my synopsis of the Sheaffer Vs. Kraker situation to correct several items of information. There is some really interesting debate about the issue going on at the Lion and Pen discussion about this.

John

Thanks for the updated synopsis John. I have seen the articles at L&P and the story is very interesting. Since a lot of infringement judgments simply require the defendant to pay past and future royalties (outside of legal fees), could Kraker has simply decided to cut his losses, pay no royalties by producing no more subject pens, and moved on to another venture?

First, I'm happy to see there is some interest here on this subject and would invite those with interest to review the thread on the Kraker Pen Company at Lion & Pen.

Roger W. provided me a copy of the file and I have been posting at L & P as I read through the documents. Although it may be convenient to refer to this file as a transcript, it is not a transcript of any one proceeding. What it actually is, is the "Record" filed by one party or the other (I don't know which) in support of their appeal brief. The Record consists almost entirely of depositions taken in connection with both the lawsuit and the Patent Interference.

It really should be noted that Sheaffer did not sue George M. Kraker or the Kraker Pen Co., but did sue C.E. Barrett, the maker of the hard rubber parts for Kraker pens. Even Walter Sheaffer testified that he had no knowledge that Kraker had ever assembled or sold any pens infringing his patent, other than the sample pen provided to Sheaffer by Barrett at Sheaffer's request. They undoubtedly intended to assemble and sell these pens as they had placed an order for 10,000 holders with Barrett that were suited for use in the allegedly infringing pens.

The lawsuit was filed 12/02/1914 and was decided in Sheaffer's favor 05/23/1917. Barrett and the Kraker Pen Co. (KPC) (who must have been brought into the suit by Barrett as a third-party defendant) appealed and the appeal was decided 01/02/1918.

By the time the Court of Appeals held that part of Sheaffer's patent had been infringed (note that Barrett and the KPC were held not guilty of infringing some of the claims in Sheaffer's patent), the KPC had been in operation for over three years and was apparently operating quite successfully. A Kansas City newspaper item on 12/24/1916, reported that the KPC was adding 3000 square feet of floor space to its factory in prepartion of manufacturing 1500 pens per day. The item also noted that KPC had purchased the Akron Fountain pen Company and was in the process of dismantling the equipment for shipment to Kansas City. It was further noted that KPC had been shipping 17,000-18,000 pens per month for the previous 3-4 months; had 100 employees; and that the KPC was making sixty different pens. It certainly appears that the KPC was a growing business at the end of 1916. Remember that the lawsuit was underway, but had not been decided in Sheaffer's favor and then there was the appeal to come.

Finally, George M. Kraker, while a central figure in this controversy, was never (at least on paper) one of the owners of the KPC. The company was incorporated by his brother, Joseph A. Kraker (who was the one in the family with money), Harvey G. Craig and Leslie A. Blumenthal. While Sheaffer, in his autobiography, claimed he made Blumenthal the manahger of his New York office after the lawsuit was completed, the 1925 City Directory still shows Blumenthal living in Kansas City with the same job he had before, manager of the collection department of R. G. Dunn.

My goal is to accurately report that which can be documented to correct some of the mis-information previously written and to learn all I can. Your comments, corrections and questions are invited and welcome. I claim no special expertise in the area of Intellectual Property Law, but I am an attorney, licensed in Missouri and Kansas.

Thanks for your attention,

Dennis B

Thanks Dennis,

I had been debating whether or not to update my post with the synopsis on it, in regard to the new information on L&P, but your post I think makes it clearer. It really is a fascinating bit of history of the early pen industry.

It is interesting to think of where we would be if this copy of the record had not turned up. There would have been nothing to really counter Walter Sheaffer's account.

John

Thanks Dennis,

My wife has a probate practice here in Texas, and out of curiosity I have been using her online research resources to see just what, if anything, I could find on the subject. Not trying to reinvent the wheel, but I will continue to follow the story from the periphery and see if my curiosity leads me anywhere.

Your timeline of events makes the story clearer to me now. At first, the story was very hard to follow but has now narrowed to more of what is known and what is missing.

Thanks.

Dennis asks, "So where did they all go?"

Here's another explanation, and one which suggests that people had just one fountain pen.

These lost-and-found ads are from the Cass City [Michigan] Chronicle; the left ad from July 22, 1927, the right ad dating from March 15, 1918.

Note that in 1927 Mr. Lenzner valued his pen enough to offer a reward for it; at that point Krakers hadn't been made for several years.